Potential Dissolution of the U.S. Department of Education: Implications and Concerns
Introduction to the Potential Changes
The U.S. Department of Education (ED) is facing significant changes as President Trump is expected to issue an executive order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to begin the process of dissolving the agency. While the timing remains uncertain, this potential move has sparked concerns among parents, students, and taxpayers about the future of the ED and the distribution of the services it currently provides.
The ED plays a crucial role in managing federal education initiatives, including student loans and grants. It currently oversees $1.5 trillion in student loans, operates the FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid), and administers funds for low-income and disabled students. Additionally, it is responsible for enforcing civil rights in education, managing the Pell Grant program, funding public charter schools, and collecting data on education outcomes.
Despite its importance, the ED is often misunderstood. Many believe it oversees school curriculums, but this is actually handled at the state and local levels. The ED’s primary role is financial, distributing billions in government funds to schools and managing the federal student loan portfolio. As Peter Granville, a fellow at The Century Foundation, noted, the ED’s role is more about ensuring access to education rather than dictating what is taught in the classroom.
The Trump Administration’s Vision for Education
The Trump administration has been critical of the ED, with President Trump describing it as a "big con job." His administration has expressed skepticism about the ED’s effectiveness, arguing that federal education funding often comes with too many regulations that hinder its impact on student outcomes.
The push to dismantle the ED aligns with the administration’s broader goal of reducing federal overreach in education. The administration supports school choice programs, such as vouchers that allow families to use tax dollars to pay for private schools, including religious institutions. This approach is part of a conservative agenda to shift education decisions back to the states and local governments.
In an email to ED staff, Secretary McMahon emphasized the administration’s goal of "ending the overreach from Washington." This perspective is consistent with Project 2025, a blueprint for a conservative administration written by the Heritage Foundation. The plan argues that federal education funding should be funneled through state and local governments, rather than being managed at the federal level.
What Happens If the ED is Abolished?
Abolishing the ED would require congressional approval and 60 votes in the Senate, which is unlikely given the current political landscape. However, the Trump administration could make significant changes to the agency without fully dissolving it. This could include reducing staff, altering oversight responsibilities, or shifting certain functions to other federal agencies.
For instance, the Trump administration could change how the ED’s Office for Civil Rights operates. The office has historically been responsible for enforcing civil rights laws in education, but the administration has suggested a different interpretation of its role. Under Trump, the office has prioritized addressing complaints of antisemitism and has investigated colleges and school sports leagues for allowing transgender athletes to compete on women’s teams.
The Trump administration is also unlikely to defend the Biden administration’s student loan forgiveness and repayment programs, which have been tied up in court cases. Last month, the ED removed the online application for income-driven repayment plans, signaling a shift in how the administration views federal student loan management.
Impact on Student Loans and the FAFSA
The ED currently manages $1.5 trillion in student loan debt for over 40 million borrowers. If the ED is dissolved, these responsibilities could be transferred to the Treasury Department or a new government corporation. However, experts like Peter Granville warn that transferring such a massive portfolio could lead to disruption, especially if the handoff is not managed smoothly.
Project 2025, the conservative blueprint for a future administration, suggests that student loans should be managed by a "new government corporation with professional governance and management." It also proposes phasing out income-based repayment plans, which help borrowers lower their monthly payments based on their income. Instead, the plan calls for a new repayment plan that would require borrowers earning above the poverty level to pay 10% of their income toward their loans. The plan also opposes any form of loan forgiveness.
The future of the FAFSA is also uncertain if the ED is abolished. The FAFSA is a critical tool for millions of students each year, enabling them to apply for federal loans, grants, and scholarships. While Congress passed a law requiring the ED to release the FAFSA annually, it is unclear which agency would handle this responsibility if the ED is dismantled.
Impact on K-12 Education Funding
The ED provides significant funding for public K-12 schools, much of which is funneled through federal programs like Title I for low-income schools and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These programs support services for students with disabilities, smaller class sizes, and additional staff such as social workers.
If the ED is abolished, these functions could be shifted to other federal agencies or to the states. Project 2025 suggests that oversight of programs for students with disabilities and low-income children could first be transferred to the Department of Health and Human Services, with the ultimate goal of phasing out federal funding and replacing it with block grants to states.
However, many educators and policymakers are concerned about the potential impact of these changes on vulnerable students. Senator Bernie Sanders, among others, has warned that shifting responsibilities to the states could lead to increased local and state taxes, placing a greater financial burden on families.
Opposition from Educators and Democrats
The potential dissolution of the ED has been met with strong opposition from educators, Democrats, and education advocacy groups. They argue that the ED plays a vital role in ensuring equal access to education and leveling the playing field for low-income and marginalized students.
The American Federation of Teachers (AFT), a union representing 1.8 million K-12 teachers, has pledged to fight the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle the ED. AFT President Randi Weingarten emphasized that states and local governments already have significant control over education decisions, including curriculum approval and graduation requirements. The ED’s role, according to Weingarten, is to "fill opportunity gaps" and ensure that every child has access to the resources they need to succeed.
Educators and Democrats are particularly concerned about the potential impact of dismantling the ED on low-income and working-class families. They argue that shifting responsibility for federal education programs to the states could lead to unequal funding and reduced support for vulnerable students. Without the ED, they fear that many families would lose access to critical resources such as Pell Grants, student loans, and programs like Title I and IDEA.
As the Trump administration considers the future of the ED, the debate over the role of the federal government in education is likely to continue. While some conservatives argue that reducing federal involvement in education will lead to greater innovation and efficiency, others warn that it could undermine efforts to ensure equity and access for all students. The stakes are high, with millions of students and families depending on the ED’s programs to achieve their educational goals. This issue is certain to remain a contentious topic in the months and years ahead.
